Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Media Apple

No Playboy App For iPad, After All 140

Posted by timothy
from the you'll-need-to-go-on-a-safari-for-that dept.
tsamsoniw writes "The rumors that a Playboy app would appear in the Apple App Store were greatly exaggerated. Playboy plans to offer an online service through which subscribers can access past and current issues of the nudie mag — and per Playboy, it will be accessible via Safari and support iPad features (whatever that means). But if Playboy does come out with a native app for iPad, all the nudity will be censored. That should be just fine for the legions of people who indeed read the magazine for the articles. This really shouldn't be a surprise, though: If Apple insists on 'protecting' users of its high-priced gear from pixelated naughty bits in a graphic-novel version of classic literature, it certainly won't let users access the full monty. It's a shame, though: If Apple's customers want access to that sort of content, Apple should allow them to get at it via a native app instead of suffering a potentially buggier, less secure browser-based experience."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

No Playboy App For iPad, After All

Comments Filter:
  • They should rather release it for the nintendo 3d thing

  • When asked for comment, outgoing CEO Steve Jobs replied, "I would cut off the more disreputable parts of the body, and use the space for playing fields."

  • by cosm (1072588) <thecosm3@EEEgmail.com minus threevowels> on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:10PM (#34961264)

    and support iPad features (whatever that means)

    It means:
    - It will be locked down.
    - Touch interaction with 'models' will be disabled.
    - Page turning will be forced on a 20 second timer to ensure users don't get too 'excited'.
    - All images of screwing will be replaced with 'pentalobular interaction'.
    - Steve Jobs will read the articles via a quaint brittish accent TTS engine.
    - All images will come with an accompanying 'I'm Offended!' reporting link.
    - All nipple shots will be replaced with miniature Natalie Portman faces.

  • by alen (225700) on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:10PM (#34961266)

    Skyfire browser for flash and to avoid being directed to the pay mobile site instead of the free desktop one
    a few apps are private browsers to hide your history from your wife
    some websites support idevices directly

    #1 is the best and is a deal at $1.99 or $2.99

  • by Improv (2467) <pgunn@dachte.org> on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:10PM (#34961272) Homepage Journal

    "But if Playboy does come out with a native app for iPad, but all the nudity will be censored." -- sentence failure!

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Locke2005 (849178)
      I think they meant to say, "But if Playboy does come out with a native app for iPad, all the butt nudity will be censored". There, I fixed that for ya... simple word transposition.
  • Buggy Browsers? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by timeOday (582209) on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:11PM (#34961276)
    I'd trust a general-purpose web browser to be more secure and less buggy than some made-up "app" any day.
    • I'd trust a general-purpose web browser to be more secure and less buggy than some made-up "app" any day.

      But then you probably have actually used an iPhone.

    • by tsj5j (1159013)

      +1.

      I'm rather annoyed at how many app developers are creating poorly-written, advertisement-filled versions of their web pages taking no advantage of being native at all. *glares at newspapers*
      I'd much prefer a platform-neutral, mobile version of the web page that will at least work for other OSes such as Android, WebOS, etc.

    • Indeed. We access our banks through web browsers these days, so the suggestion that the web isn't safe and reliable enough for a girlie mag is rather ridiculous.

      The real reason that publications would prefer to have a native app than a web app is left unsaid: It would give them access to the App Store shopping cart. Easy one click purchasing for the millions of people that have accounts.

  • Seems to me that what they're describing is a web app, which someone can save to the home screen just like any other iPad app. Unless the app needs to do something particularly special with hardware, sound, 3D animation, the camera, etc. (which I can't imagine this sort of app doing), the only significant distinction between that and a native (store) app is the payment model.... (And the language it's written in, of course, but a user doesn't see that part.)

    Much ado about nothing, methinks.

    • The Playboy Archive [playboyarchive.com]requires Silverlight to see anything useful (the articles, natch). Hard to see how that's gonna work on the pad. Maybe they'll make a special edition since the stuff on the website is just a teaser to get you to plunk down some cash.
      • by dgatwood (11270)

        Silverlight would be just as much of a nonstarter on iOS in a native app, though.

      • by wdef (1050680)

        Just had a look at the online Playboy Archive. It's a little clumsy to navigate - no doubt deliberately so people buy the full archive. And yes I was using both hands .... :=)

        A strange flashback moment seeing stuff from a 1970s edition I used to have. Gauze lens shots. Thick pubic hair. Some top notch interviews (getting the order of importance right here).

        But to really see how times have changed: Feb 01, 1973 has an inset thumbnail of a model when she was 3yo, naked from behind. Completely innocent

    • Maybe this has some other advantages I haven't seen mentioned, like the possibility of being used on Android or other mobile platforms? If its on the web, it should be accessible to more than just iPad users.
  • Indeed (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Errsher (1771244)
    Thank God for Apple, no need for those pesky Parental Controls when Steve Jobs our Lord and Savior is watching over the flock.
  • it makes parents feel comfortable buying their kids iPads and iPhones

    now you don't have to like this marketing ploy, and you don't have to like the rationale behind the parent's thinking. but you have to admit it works, it brings in the $, and that's all that matters

    • by S77IM (1371931)

      it brings in the $, and that's all that matters

      And that, ladies and gentlemen, is about 3/4 of what's wrong with our society.

        -- 77IM

    • by tlhIngan (30335)

      it makes parents feel comfortable buying their kids iPads and iPhones

      now you don't have to like this marketing ploy, and you don't have to like the rationale behind the parent's thinking. but you have to admit it works, it brings in the $, and that's all that matters

      It's basically summarized in Apple's approval guidelines - kids use iPhones and iPod Touches these days, and parents don't always set the parental controls correctly, which make them just as useless as the V-chip and other parental control techn

  • native app instead of suffering a potentially buggier, less secure browser-based experience.

    Care to explain what it even means? I mean, sure, any app X is potentially buggier than some other app Y (possibly except when Y is ATI Linux proprietary driver). But why would web apps be specifically buggier than native, and how is it any less secure? If anything, it seems to be more secure to me - native app means running native code on your device, while web app means running sandboxed JavaScript.

    • by dgatwood (11270)

      If you're writing straight to the built-in APIs, it's a lot harder to write an app in JavaScript than in Objective-C. Specifically, it's a lot easier to make mistakes when you're hand-coding all the DOM manipulation yourself instead of relying on widget toolkits that do the heavy lifting for you.

      Of course, that argument goes away as soon as you use a decent JavaScript toolkit.

      As for less secure... well, there's no keychain in the browser, for one, which probably isn't a big deal for something like this, bu

    • by anti-NAT (709310)
      Care to explain what it even means? Poster has been drinking the Steve Jobs iPad Kool-Aid. Surely you knew that native apps were naturally less buggier and more secure - Steve said so.
  • by demonlapin (527802) on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:20PM (#34961370) Homepage Journal
    This is bizarre. Playboy is R-rated, not NC-17, and Apple already distributes music that carries the [EXPLICIT] tag. Hell, they sell and rent Fast Times at Ridgemont High [imdb.com], and there's nothing you can see in Playboy that's not in that movie, and nothing they say in Playboy that's not in American Pie [imdb.com].
    • by ColdWetDog (752185) on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:25PM (#34961402) Homepage

      This is bizarre. Playboy is R-rated, not NC-17, and Apple already distributes music that carries the [EXPLICIT] tag. Hell, they sell and rent Fast Times at Ridgemont High [imdb.com], and there's nothing you can see in Playboy that's not in that movie, and nothing they say in Playboy that's not in American Pie [imdb.com].

      Dunno about that. Apparently this month's edition has 43 year old Pamela Anderson showing off her poetry.

      Do Not Want.

    • Re: (Score:1, Offtopic)

      It used to be necessary for the US Government to hire people who were known as "Kremlinologists," people who had spent years studying the history and culture of the Soviet Union and observing the politics and processes within the Politburo. Their role was to assist in formulating policy related to an utterly alien and intimidating foreign power, impermeable and mysterious to the rest of the world, yet strong enough to destroy civilization on a whim. Shrub's secretary of state, Condi Rice, was an example o

    • by jeff4747 (256583)

      I'm guessing you haven't bought a copy of Playboy recently. They decided they needed to 'keep up' with the Internet a while ago.

      • It's been at least a decade. I just checked out the website. Interesting to see how things have changed. Still much more toned down than the other stuff out there.
  • ...start reading up on rooting the ipad.

  • Just to be clear (Score:5, Insightful)

    by tsman (1980532) on Friday January 21, 2011 @08:38PM (#34961492)
    So once again: Gore, Murder, Violence, Beheading, Rape - Acceptable Breasts, Buttocks, Genitals, i.e...The Human Body = Unacceptable /sigh
    • I think you may have missed some punctuation between Acceptable and Breasts. That must account for the Troll mod, I can't see any other reason for it...
    • Don't forget that saying certain words is also unacceptable....

      • Another thought: "curse words" are bad, but actually placing a curse on someone is fine. People wish drastic and graphic misfortune on others, but so long as they do it with the established acceptable phrasing, then no one bats an eyelash. I think someone lost the key point somewhere.

    • by Stan92057 (737634)
      Sex,nudity leads to Underage pregnancy/rape/date rape,poverty,welfare,broken family's,murders,gore,beheading, violence,wars. And who said it was acceptable? The violent movies have age ratings.
      • by tsman (1980532)
        1. Sex and Nudity don't lead to Any one of those items on your list. I have to believe you are either trolling or just being funny. If you honestly DO believe that utter nonsense, you aren't the type of person with whom any rational person may engage in actual discourse. 2. The "acceptability" factor comes into play by the fact that content containing the above mentioned explicit material containing violence is allowed, whereas nudity is being censored. Fact: Violence is shown/disseminated with very l
      • by houghi (78078)

        So if not showing sex leads to less ex, then not showing violence would lead to less violence.

  • "Apple should allow them to get at if via a native app instead of suffering a potentially buggier, less secure browser-based experience" mmm kay, that's a leap.
    • Leap? It's complete BS. Native apps are fine for things that require high-performance graphics (like games) or that need lower level integration with a device's sensors (like a camera app, a paint program, GPS stuff). For displaying text (sorry, "articles") and images, a browser-based experience is very much what I'd prefer, be it playboy or slashdot.

      And "less secure"? Good lord what a reservoir of hogwash. I'll tell you what's less secure: Unnecessarily adding an additional piece of software on your machi

      • Or you know if the actual site has you using something like Flash, Java or Silverlight it isn't going to be viewable on the iPad through the browser since great leader Jobs doesn't think that people need useful stuff like that.
        • by smash (1351)
          Dashcode + html5 h.264 video = near enough to native without worrying about security in your app. Security being looked after by safari. People bitching are android shills who have no idea.
  • by Anonymous Coward

    I guess the "early adopters" will need an iPad (Betamax) and another tablet (VHS) :-)

  • by DamnStupidElf (649844) <Fingolfin@linuxmail.org> on Friday January 21, 2011 @09:38PM (#34961906)
    "pinch" to zoom, indeed...
  • booo timothy

  • I can find any porn (from straight missionary to stuff that makes you wonder if you've zapped into a parallel universe) for free at any time.

    Who cares what Apple is allowing on the App store?

    Do I really need porn in a 10 inch window, or is that *way* too loaded of a question? :-) We have reached the promised age of 3D, 1080p-orn on 70" screens in surround sound.

    I'm serious about that parallel Earth thing. I saw porn last week where the number of people and number of genitalia just didn't add up right. :-(

  • The HTML5 API is the open iOS API. That is where all the nudity is. It's unmediated. It's perfect for Playboy. The iPad features are touch events and WebKit enhancements.

    The Cocoa API on iOS is managed so that it is an alternative to anything-goes HTML5. Yes, you can shop at App Store with freedom from porn, because you can't get away from it on the Web. Yin and yang. Balance. Choice. I know it is unfamiliar totalitarian nerd like the original poster, but luckily there is at least one company giving users w

  • ...Apple should allow them to get at it via a native app instead of suffering a potentially buggier, less secure browser-based experience.

    This is so terribly wrong headed.
  • To hell with Playboy. Bring back the complete archives of Omni Magazine as an app: I'd pay for that, as would many others, and it would be a lot more entertaining than historical smut.
    • by sjonke (457707)

      I wouldn't suggest putting those punchout turntable drug trips on the record player, though.

There is no royal road to geometry. -- Euclid

Working...